David Simpson

I agree with the nitpicking. I hate purity tests

ah ok. i didn't know that

How do you mean antisemitism?

YouTube video by David Moore I never thought the leopards would eat my face.

youtube.com/shorts/Seg5z...

Back Zack for leader of the Green Party Zack Polanski is running for leader of the Green Party. We need bold action and bold leadership now. It's time to back Zack.

If 'all the world's a stage' it would be great if we knew someone who brought

Alexander Hamilton energy,
Alex from Glasto gusto plus

Alexander Armstrong savvy (without bleating on about school fees, obvs).

We do!!

Get in the room where it happens on backzack.com

@zackpolanski.bsky.social

My god I hate these two

Here are the care workers who sacrificed their lives for our elders

Almost all exclusively people of colour, all at some stage migrants or their parents

Starmer should be ashamed but he has none, and neither do his bootlicking supporters

If we really want to challenge the stigmatisation of mental illness, we need to not just call out the discrimination from what we do and think, but also what we say. If we can conquer these, we will have half way created a better society.

I might write a substack on this!

But I want to be fair to Turn Left, because the continued use of the phrase committing suicide is also a product of a society which is still stacked against people with mental illness. This is part of the culture that stigmatisation eminates from.

Suicide used to be seen as a 'felon on oneself', or self-murder and you could be given a prison sentence if someone survived a suicide. The 1961 Suicide Act decriminalised suicide.

The title is "Jeffrey Epstein Victim Virginia Giuffre 'Commits Suicide'". The key word here is 'commits'. Why do I have such objection to the use of this word and phrase commits suicide? You have to trace it back to pre-1961 bad law.

I don't have a problem with the discussion broadcast within this video, however the title of the video is very problematic and this is what I have found quite triggering, as myself has lived with depression and anxiety for over 30 years and sometimes have suicidal ideation.

This is not a blame game post, but want to highlight something that is problematic but mirrors our use of language towards mental health and suicide.

I came across a video recording of a live edition of Turn Left and their main discussion of the suicide of Virginia Giuffre.

So does this mean that water companies run for public benefit are just as good as water companies that would be in public ownership?

I quite like the tag 'Corbynistas on Steroids'

12 so far. I think there’ll be more

Evil wins when good people do nothing

Using private companies is privatisation. We can renationalise. Majority of public want it, government can issue bonds with no expense to the taxpayer. The only reason we can’t is Steve Reed receiving donations from private water companies and fiscal rules which are unnecessary.

So no, poverty has not reduced and to add to the last point, 250,000 people including 50,000 children will fall into poverty.

Won’t renationalise rail, mail, water and energy, pushing privatisation through the NHS.

Should I go on?

Because they’ve kept the 2 child cap, which charities and unions say if it was scrapped would reduce poverty overnight.

Ended universal winter fuel allowance, exacerbating fuel poverty for many pensioners, even more so for disabled pensioners, and cutting £9bn in pip, meaning 90% go without

Signed

Something that can powerfully overthrow the austerity story and culture and is people centred.

My thinking is the left must have a compelling story that can enhance the demands we want the public to hear and take on board. One that resonates with people's day to day experiences and that can take people on a journey from where we are now to where we would much like to be.

I think the line we demand change is a good starting point on not just physical action (protesting, joining striking workers which are of course important), but how do we communicate and message the demands of we demand change.

Another post before I go to bed.

This evening I attended the We Demand Change - what next? online meeting, which was interesting but did not give enough of a platform for the audience to put forward comments and positions or ideas.

The footballification of policy continues as expected

Thats not what I said. Of course they don't. I was saying because Labour aren't serious about reducing poverty, Reform will exploit this.

There are no words. Labour has no intention, despite what they say, of reducing poverty. That gives Reform plenty of ammunition which we need to resist. The Greens need to stand up and resist Reform and present our own vision which is pro-working class.

And then decisions will be made with very little input from the disabled. Disgraceful.

Time for a change

Because the democratic (?) system we live under deliberately disempowers people, by leaving very little room to hold politicians to account.

Top down decision making does not work, e.g., the government wants to take away benefits for 9 out of 10 disabled people with very little consultation.